Lame… Or did the prosecutor mismanaged this case and try the perpetrator under the wrong statue?
The way our legal system works is this: If the prosecutor charged a criminal under criminal statue A and C, but the criminal is guilty of violating criminal statue B and neither A nor B, the jury and the judge must find him not guilty (likely reluctantly). So this is why it’s important for prosecutors to charge people under the correct and accurate statue. This is actually how predatory vigilantes like George Zimmerman got off scot free. And this is why there was a lot of talk about whether Derek Chauvin is tried under the correct statue even though it’s so obvious what he did was a very egregious crime.
This is the reason why I don’t hate on judges or juries, their job is to determine guilt in relation to the very specific charges the prosecutor brings, not as to whether the criminal’s conduct was evil, a predator, or whatever. So the fault does not lie with judge in this case, but with either prosecutor services or the lacking of proper law. (or maybe both prosecutor and improperly written law).
Is there truly no law to prevent this?
The reason why I ask is because it seems possible that this man violated federal child pornography law in terms of lewd and lascivious exhibitions of the pubic region, genitals or anus. Something can be considered a violation of the dost test even if clothed.
Considering this, doesn’t upskirt imagery which involve minors violate child pornography laws even if taken in public? I read the legal code, there is nothing in it that even suggests doing so in public would be a defense. So wouldn’t this criminal be guilty of a child pornography statue?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oregon-upskirt-idUSKBN0LB03D20150207
Washington County Circuit Court Judge Eric Butterfield ruled on Thursday that Patrick Buono did not break the law when he surreptitiously took the pictures of the girl in January 2013, said his defense attorney Mark Lawrence.
The practice of “upskirting” has caused problems for prosecutors in other court cases where there are no laws on the books preventing people from taking unauthorized pictures up the skirts of clothed women in public places.
Maloney said he thinks lawmakers could provide more clarity, “but it was clear what conduct the defendant engaged in.”